Patriotism and Common Sense

Ali

The Article by Mr. Baig entitled 'Path of a Patriot' is a much needed starting point for a debate that has been burning around campuses since the imposition of Martial Law. Before beginning my analysis, I would like to highlight that discussion on this point should continue since it is essential for understanding the present situation. While I completely agree with Mr Baig that the removal of the General is not a cause worth endorsing on its own, I have serious reservations about what has subsequently been said in the article. Let me first highlight what I conceive the General's removal to mean. I agree that if the General were removed today, and another military ruler took over, we would not have moved an inch beyond where we stand today. This means that the fundamental fight is NOT against General Musharraf as a person, but the institutional role of an unelected, hierarchical entity in Pakistani politics, i.e. the military. This is an underlying point on which my response to Mr Baig's article would attempt to build upon. This means that Mr Pervaiz Musharraf, contrary to what Mr Baig believes, DID not go through a metamorphosis from an Idealist, to a proponent of realpolitick and finally a Machiavellian Prince. Rather, the very removal of Nawaz Sharif by a military General shows how the ROOT of the malady facing Pakistan, is not Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif; it is the continued interference of the army in the polity of the country, masquerading as our saviour.

It is natural therefore, that the present struggle is a struggle against this institution that has thwarted any attempts for democratic consent to exist in this country ( ignoring the argument that we are not ready for democracy, often found in elite circles and more recently in the General's martial law imposition speech). Ofcourse, politicians have always been a support mechanism for military regimes, but the overiding power has always existed with the army. The assertion that Benazir is a more vociferous proponent of international interests is absolutely incorrect since BB's party atleast has roots within the masses Pakistan, unless ofcourse, Mr Baig conforms to the same elitist sensibilities that PPP supporters are nothing more than illiterate peasants, easily duped by their leader everytime. General Musharraf has absolutely no roots within this country (his referendum can be testament to that) and Mr Bush still calls him America's 'Staunch ally' in the war on terror. Who can forget the billions of dollars received by Pakistan to butcher innocent Afghani's, massacre its own people in Waziristan and Swat to counter 'Terrorism' and the selling out of Pakistan's assets (including telecommunications) to foregin companies. Even the General's Prime Minister, Mr SHORTCUT Aziz, a man with no political constituency in Pakistan, is like a 'Gift' to Musharraf from International Donour Agencies. No one represents international strategic interests more than the General, and the reason for this is the fact that dictatorships in Pakistan have never found popular support amognst the mass. Insteadm the have relied primarily upon international powers (with a few local renegades thrown in, like the Chaudry brothers today).

As for corruption, who can compete with the Army's billions of dollars of legitimate corruption, using the state appratus to obtain loans and grants for businesses, from construction to corn flakes. The Army is also the biggest land holder in the country, fleecing several thousand peasants off their lands to make poultry farms and farm houses. Field Marshals, like Khattak Abbas Khan are known to have recieved kickbacks of 180 million rupees through the sale of mirage fighters. Countless other cases of corruption exist that are never investigated due to the fear of the military, while all attention is cast upon the corruption of politicians. The Armed forces already recieve more than 50 % of the budget to kill its own people in Balochistan, Swat and Waziristan and sells nuclear weapons to other countries. The reason for viewing politicians as corrupt and ignoring the biggest corruptor, stems from years of a 'sytematic demeaning of politics' in this country, the brunt of which has been borne by the PPP. This comes as no surprise since the PPP is perhaps the only party with a consistent record of fighting the military establishment. Notwithstanding the fact that Benazir is corrupt, the biggest danger to unity today stems from creating fissures in the opposition by calling an end to Benazir along with the General. The reasons are quite simple. The fight against dictatorship can only succeed if a democractic government of National Unity is formed, something that all political parties, including the PPP is calling for. Democracy without BB would ignore the biggest political opposition to the Military Establishment, without which any democratic set-up is unforseeable atleast in the near future. We definitely need to bypass BB at some point in time, just like we need to bypass the PML (N), or the Jamat-i-Islami. This is only possible, however, if we allow democratic processes to find their course, citizens to scrutinize their leaders, and most importantly, if we reject the misguided notion that we need UNIFYING LEADERS. We do not need unifying leaders to be our saviours, this would be the same as the General's claim. We need democratic institutions to be allowed to take route, and the only way for that to happen, is if the military is taken out of the power equation permanently, and a democratic government of national unity through free and fair elections is allowed to function. Any other path can create discord amongst the opposition and turn our attention away from the main struggle of the present time.